Personality Cafe banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,857 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A verbatim excerpt taken from Chapter 10 of Carl Gustav Jung's work "Psychological Types" (1921):

=============================================


(III) PECULIARITIES OF THE BASIC PSYCHOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS IN THE INTROVERTED ATTITUDE

8. Intuition

Intuition, in the introverted attitude, is directed upon the inner object, a term we might justly apply to the elements of the unconscious. For the relation of inner objects to consciousness is entirely analogous to that of outer objects, although theirs is a psychological and not a physical reality. Inner objects appear to the intuitive perception as subjective images of things, which, though not met with in external experience, really determine the contents of the unconscious, i.e. the collective unconscious, in the last resort. Naturally, in their per se character, these contents are, not accessible to experience, a quality which they have in common with the outer object. For just as outer objects correspond only relatively with our perceptions of them, so the phenomenal forms of the inner object are also relative; products of their (to us) inaccessible essence and of the peculiar nature of the intuitive function. Like sensation, intuition also has its subjective factor, which is suppressed to the farthest limit in the extraverted intuition, but which becomes the decisive factor in the intuition of the introvert. Although this intuition may receive its impetus from outer objects, it is never arrested by the external possibilities, but stays with that factor which the outer object releases within.

Whereas introverted sensation is mainly confined to the perception of particular innervation phenomena by way of the unconscious, and does not go beyond them, intuition represses this side of the subjective factor and perceives the image which has really occasioned the innervation. Supposing, for instance, a man is overtaken by a psychogenic attack of giddiness. Sensation is arrested by the peculiar character of this innervationdisturbance, perceiving all its qualities, its intensity, its transient course, the nature of its origin and disappearance [p. 506] in their every detail, without raising the smallest inquiry concerning the nature of the thing which produced the disturbance, or advancing anything as to its content. Intuition, on the other hand, receives from the sensation only the impetus to immediate activity; it peers behind the scenes, quickly perceiving the inner image that gave rise to the specific phenomenon, i.e. the attack of vertigo, in the present case. It sees the image of a tottering man pierced through the heart by an arrow. This image fascinates the intuitive activity; it is arrested by it, and seeks to explore every detail of it. It holds fast to the vision, observing with the liveliest interest how the picture changes, unfolds further, and finally fades. In this way introverted intuition perceives all the background processes of consciousness with almost the same distinctness as extraverted sensation senses outer objects. For intuition, therefore, the unconscious images attain to the dignity of things or objects. But, because intuition excludes the co-operation of sensation, it obtains either no knowledge at all or at the best a very inadequate awareness of the innervation-disturbances or of the physical effects produced by the unconscious images. Accordingly, the images appear as though detached from the subject, as though existing in themselves without relation to the person.

Consequently, in the above-mentioned example, the introverted intuitive, when affected by the giddiness, would not imagine that the perceived image might also in some way refer to himself. Naturally, to one who is rationally orientated, such a thing seems almost unthinkable, but it is none the less a fact, and I have often experienced it in my dealings with this type.

The remarkable indifference of the extraverted intuitive in respect to outer objects is shared by the introverted intuitive in relation to the inner objects. Just as the extraverted intuitive is continually scenting out new [p. 507] possibilities, which he pursues with an equal unconcern both for his own welfare and for that of others, pressing on quite heedless of human considerations, tearing down what has only just been established in his everlasting search for change, so the introverted intuitive moves from image to image, chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious, without establishing any connection between the phenomenon and himself. Just as the world can never become a moral problem for the man who merely senses it, so the world of images is never a moral problem to the intuitive. To the one just as much as to the other, it is an ae[]sthenic problem, a question of perception, a 'sensation'. In this way, the consciousness of his own bodily existence fades from the introverted intuitive's view, as does its effect upon others. The extraverted standpoint would say of him: 'Reality has no existence for him; he gives himself up to fruitless phantasies'. A perception of the unconscious images, produced in such inexhaustible abundance by the creative energy of life, is of course fruitless from the standpoint of immediate utility. But, since these images represent possible ways of viewing life, which in given circumstances have the power to provide a new energic potential, this function, which to the outer world is the strangest of all, is as indispensable to the total psychic economy as is the corresponding human type to the psychic life of a people. Had this type not existed, there would have been no prophets in Israel.

Introverted intuition apprehends the images which arise from the a priori, i.e. the inherited foundations of the unconscious mind. These archetypes, whose innermost nature is inaccessible to experience, represent the precipitate of psychic functioning of the whole ancestral line, i.e. the heaped-up, or pooled, experiences of organic existence in general, a million times repeated, and condensed into types. Hence, in these archetypes all experiences are [p. 508] represented which since primeval time have happened on this planet. Their archetypal distinctness is the more marked, the more frequently and intensely they have been experienced. The archetype would be -- to borrow from Kant -- the noumenon of the image which intuition perceives and, in perceiving, creates.

Since the unconscious is not just something that lies there, like a psychic caput mortuum, but is something that coexists and experiences inner transformations which are inherently related to general events, introverted intuition, through its perception of inner processes, gives certain data which may possess supreme importance for the comprehension of general occurrences: it can even foresee new possibilities in more or less clear outline, as well as the event which later actually transpires. Its prophetic prevision is to be explained from its relation to the archetypes which represent the law-determined course of all experienceable things.

9. The Introverted Intuitive Type

The peculiar nature of introverted intuition, when given the priority, also produces a peculiar type of man, viz. the mystical dreamer and seer on the one hand, or the fantastical crank and artist on the other. The latter might be regarded as the normal case, since there is a general tendency of this type to confine himself to the perceptive character of intuition. As a rule, the intuitive stops at perception; perception is his principal problem, and -- in the case of a productive artist-the shaping of perception. But the crank contents himself with the intuition by which he himself is shaped and determined. Intensification of intuition naturally often results in an extraordinary aloofness of the individual from tangible reality; he may even become a complete enigma to his own immediate circle. [p. 509]

If an artist, he reveals extraordinary, remote things in his art, which in iridescent profusion embrace both the significant and the banal, the lovely and the grotesque, the whimsical and the sublime. If not an artist, he is frequently an unappreciated genius, a great man 'gone wrong', a sort of wise simpleton, a figure for 'psychological' novels.

Although it is not altogether in the line of the introverted intuitive type to make of perception a moral problem, since a certain reinforcement of the rational functions is required for this, yet even a relatively slight differentiation of judgment would suffice to transfer intuitive perception from the purely æsthetic into the moral sphere. A variety of this type is thus produced which differs essentially from its æsthetic form, although none the less characteristic of the introverted intuitive. The moral problem comes into being when the intuitive tries to relate himself to his vision, when he is no longer satisfied with mere perception and its æsthetic shaping and estimation, but confronts the question: What does this mean for me and for the world? What emerges from this vision in the way of a duty or task, either for me or for the world? The pure intuitive who represses judgment or possesses it only under the spell of perception never meets this question fundamentally, since his only problem is the How of perception. He, therefore, finds the moral problem unintelligible, even absurd, and as far as possible forbids his thoughts to dwell upon the disconcerting vision. It is different with the morally orientated intuitive. He concerns himself with the meaning of his vision; he troubles less about its further æsthetic possibilities than about the possible moral effects which emerge from its intrinsic significance. His judgment allows him to discern, though often only darkly, that he, as a man and as a totality, is in some way inter-related with his vision, that [p. 510] it is something which cannot just be perceived but which also would fain become the life of the subject. Through this realization he feels bound to transform his vision into his own life. But, since he tends to rely exclusively upon his vision, his moral effort becomes one-sided; he makes himself and his life symbolic, adapted, it is true, to the inner and eternal meaning of events, but unadapted to the actual present-day reality. Therewith he also deprives himself of any influence upon it, because he remains unintelligible. His language is not that which is commonly spoken -- it becomes too subjective. His argument lacks convincing reason. He can only confess or pronounce. His is the 'voice of one crying in the wilderness'.

The introverted intuitive's chief repression falls upon the sensation of the object. His unconscious is characterized by this fact. For we find in his unconscious a compensatory extraverted sensation function of an archaic character. The unconscious personality may, therefore, best be described as an extraverted sensation-type of a rather low and primitive order. Impulsiveness and unrestraint are the characters of this sensation, combined with an extraordinary dependence upon the sense impression. This latter quality is a compensation to the thin upper air of the conscious attitude, giving it a certain weight, so that complete 'sublimation' is prevented. But if, through a forced exaggeration of the conscious attitude, a complete subordination to the inner perception should develop, the unconscious becomes an opposition, giving rise to compulsive sensations whose excessive dependence upon the object is in frank conflict with the conscious attitude. The form of neurosis is a compulsion-neurosis, exhibiting symptoms that are partly hypochondriacal manifestations, partly hypersensibility of the sense organs and partly compulsive ties to definite persons or other objects. [p. 511]

[ Web Source: http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm ]


=============================================

Questions for INTJ's:
What parts can you specifically relate to?
Does any of this describe you well?

What are your thoughts in general?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,325 Posts
Thank you for this. It shows just how much Kiersey was talking out of his ass when describing the INTJ. I'd quote parts I identified with but it would end up being almost the entirety of the post except the pronouns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
As an INFJ, I share Elyasis' view entirely. It is a shame tosee how brilliant insights, like those of Jung, can become so mangled by beingoverly handled by the incompetent, who look to these theories as a chance tostart a new board game rather than learn something which carries with it theopportunity for transcendent wisdom and truth; and thus the potential foradvancement of the human condition, in such a wide range of ways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
As an INFJ, I share Elyasis' view entirely. It is a shame tosee how brilliant insights, like those of Jung, can become so mangled by beingoverly handled by the incompetent, who look to these theories as a chance tostart a new board game rather than learn something which carries with it theopportunity for transcendent wisdom and truth; and thus the potential foradvancement of the human condition, in such a wide range of ways.
Wow that was so profound and spot on that I depersonalized a bit when I read it.
 

·
Administrator
INTJ - ILI - 8w9 - Libtard
Joined
·
22,602 Posts
I can relate to a fair bit of it. Especially when I was younger and writing vast amounts of poetry. Some people would look at it and say wow whilst others would see a fair amount of gibber. As a matter of fact I kept a few notebooks and they were read by my ex. He kept on quoting them out of context and looking at me like I had completely lost my mind. I burnt them out of embarrassment. A few other friends that I've known for a long time had said out of the blue afterwards that I inspired them when we were young with my rantings and writings. Go figure.

I relate to being a bit of a simpleton, or an honest fool. The simplest of misunderstandings can alienate you whilst the simple things you say can draw a crowd. I've never got it so I stopped trying and started to focus more on what is tangible to stop the spiraling. I'm grounded and not so tortured by the stupidity and cruelness of people....and I turned off the TV. It helps with the inner ranting, anger and solitude and I can look on everyday people with new wonderment, and like them.
 

·
Administrator
INTJ - ILI - 8w9 - Libtard
Joined
·
22,602 Posts
Deploying obligatory pop culture imagery in 3, 2, 1....

View attachment 87032
Heh. Not even close. I've never been an actual fool, Just a blurting maniac who people think is far more devious/mad than what I actually am from what they perceive I omit (which is very very little). I don't blend well.

This comic character is more me.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,184 Posts
Thank you for this. It shows just how much Kiersey was talking out of his ass when describing the INTJ. I'd quote parts I identified with but it would end up being almost the entirety of the post except the pronouns.
Keirsey was talking out of his ass with ALL his type descriptions.

Other than that, I think it's terrific that this has been posted here. I think this clears up any confusion I have and that I am an Ni user.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
534 Posts
I'm not an INTJ, but as an INFJ, I relate to this description quite a bit. I forget where, but I remember hearing somewhere that INJs think in images, which Jung's description seems to support. I like how he describes the introverted intuitive as almost being a collector of archetypes. It's that idea that I relate to the most; as a child I often would often abstract situations describes in books or film to their most basic ideas and then watch them play out in the real world. Another thing that I like about Jung's description in particular is that it seems to understate the 'prophetic' aspects of this function. While those are definitely there, I feel like they tend to get overly pronounced in contemporary understandings of Jung's work. I see visions of the future all the time, but they're not always right, which is what people today seem to think. As a whole, though, if aiming to understand the functions, I think Jung is the best place to read up on Ni.

And as for Keirsey, I think that most contemporary psychologists lack a basic understanding of the functions; they seem to get ignored because they can't be 'empirically proven', and science is thus that anything that cannot be tested doesn't exist as far as it is concerned (never mind the epistemological problems with such a view). Most types descriptions tend to be very lacking as a result--I was reading the descriptions on 16personalities the other day and was rather shocked to find how samey all of them are. No that ESTJ is anywhere close to INTP, but INFJ and INFP could almost be copy-pasted, just adding "the one's who actually get things done" to the INFJ page and "idealists who never accomplish anything" to the INFPs. The irony about this (and most websites that only use the letters) is that INFJs are entirely capable of being unaccomplished and INFPs are entirely capable of changing the world, but because of the amount of rhetoric these sites put into explaining that all Js are organized and diligent and all Ps are sloppy and improvisational forces them to say that all J types get things done, even when that is far from the truth, especially with IxxJ types. They don't seem to realize that 'J' in their language really means 'ESTJ'.
 

·
Spam-I-am
Joined
·
13,734 Posts
I can relate to a fair bit of it. Especially when I was younger and writing vast amounts of poetry. Some people would look at it and say wow whilst others would see a fair amount of gibber. As a matter of fact I kept a few notebooks and they were read by my ex. He kept on quoting them out of context and looking at me like I had completely lost my mind. I burnt them out of embarrassment. A few other friends that I've known for a long time had said out of the blue afterwards that I inspired them when we were young with my rantings and writings. Go figure.

I relate to being a bit of a simpleton, or an honest fool. The simplest of misunderstandings can alienate you whilst the simple things you say can draw a crowd. I've never got it so I stopped trying and started to focus more on what is tangible to stop the spiraling. I'm grounded and not so tortured by the stupidity and cruelness of people....and I turned off the TV. It helps with the inner ranting, anger and solitude and I can look on everyday people with new wonderment, and like them.
this is INTJ poetry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Thread resurrection!

Interesting, this. When I first came across MBTI/typing I bought Psych Types and (tried to) read it, and realised how far MBTI had bent the original theory to cram it into something sellable. Hence even these forums are probably a bit misguided if you rely on the various descriptions and descriptors ("Scientist" indeed!). HOWEVER, if you've answer the 93 MBTI questions honestly, you ARE a INTJ/ESFP etc and have something in common with others of this type, even if the underlying theory is pretty ropey. Not that Jung is any less ropey (certainly less intelligible), but he isn't mangled in the way that MBTI/Kiersey are.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top